Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Postmark On CE773


Recommended Posts

David,

you should consider retirement. Your MO is getting old.

I talk about facts. You call them theories and go into a rant about all the theories no longer standing (according to you).

----------------------

Did the WC and FBI waste resources in compiling a LHO bio?

A simple yes or no,

-------------------------

Why is it "muddying" the waters to point out that John Pic was a hunter of subversives while he younger brother was living with him? If Mrs Ruby's dental records have relevance, why on earth do you think this does not?

Why is it "muddying" the waters to point out that a CIA agent was present during Oswald's discussion with Richard Snyder? Why did Snyder lie by telling the WC no one else was present?

Why is it "muddying" the waters to point out a CIA trained NTS agent was running around Minsk recruiting "morally loose" elements of Minsk society while Oswald was living there - especially since he married a woman who had a rep for being "loose" and who would hook up with NTS types in Dallas?

---------------------------

Re your "bunch of nothing" charge:

Let me give you a bit more. Oswald had NO truancy problems until he turned 13. The US (mainly CIA and military) was very interested in studying kids from age 13 to 17 (when they became of enlistment age) in order to proactively deal with the types identified as potential defectors. Potential defectors (as previously explained) were identified as having the following profile: from the South; no father figure; average to above average intelligence; a history of rebellion (truancy etc). The US wanted to turn future generations of young men into compliant patriots who would never betray their country in the fight against Communism. Let's call it, say... "Rugged Individualism... Within a Framework of Rules".

So LHO went from happy school kid at 12 to truant at 13 - the starting age of interest. Then he suddenly quit being a truant - NOT when he left NYC and therefore was no longer a fish out of water (the usual reason given to explain his behavior) - no. He quit being a truant while still in NYC as soon as his brother left the PSU where he had contact with both FBI and ONI.

Oswald's potential defector profile was mounting up.

He was from the South. His IQ was slightly above average. He now had a record for truancy. And neither he nor his mother told the PO or anyone at Youth House anything about Mr Ekdahl who indeed had indeed been a father figure to Oswald. So no father figure gets ticked as well.

There is NO theory here, David. The above items are all facts.

You may not like them. You may not believe they have relevance (though I would like you to attempt to defend that position, if it is true). But what you can't do is call them a "theory" as an excuse for another broad brush attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Do you want to "go" somewhere with your "facts" above, Greg? Or do you prefer to just state such peripheral things re John Pic and Ed Keenan and leave them hanging out there, unattached to any of the actual evidence in the JFK case?

Spell it out for us -- you think Oswald was working as an Intelligence agent at age 13? Right? And you think the Intelligence agency that employed the very young Oswald ultimately murdered the President and framed Oswald for that crime? Right?

(I can't blame you for not wanting to come out and admit that you believe in that kind of stuff, Greg. I wouldn't want to go on record with garbage like that either.)

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spell it out for us -- you think Oswald was working as an Intelligence agent at age 13? Right? And you think the Intelligence agency that employed the very young Oswald ultimately murdered the President and framed Oswald for that crime? Right?

What makes you think that intelligence agencies do not use teenagers and old people as intellegence agents? I suspect very strongly that they do. The sterotypical agent you see in the movies is what they want you to believe. Having said all this I do not have any idea if Oswald was an intelligence agent for any country at the age of 13 or any other age.

Edited by Mike Rago
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you want to "go" somewhere with your "facts" above, Greg?

David, please pay attention. I have already indicated my intent was to demonstrate that the history you and Mr Mack claim as the "final word" is neither complete, nor necessarily accurate in all regards.

Or do you prefer to just state such peripheral things re John Pic and Ed Keenan and leave them hanging out there, unattached to any of the actual evidence in the JFK case?

Please explain the relationship between Fanny Rubinstein's and Marna Oswald's dental records to your evidence in the case. I think having a brother involved in outing commies and having a CIA agent present while you're attempting to defect are far more relevant. You may disagree, but I think you'd be laughed out of any kindergarten if you tried to sell that to 6 year olds.

Spell it out for us -- you think Oswald was working as an Intelligence agent at age 13? Right? And you think the Intelligence agency that employed the very young Oswald ultimately murdered the President and framed Oswald for that crime? Right?

You and Mr Mack talk about CT's whining? Listen to your own wailing. You whine when anyone presents a theory claiming you just want facts. When someone presents facts, you whine even louder that they haven't presented any theory. You really are in a double bind there, aren't you?

(I can't blame you for not wanting to come out and admit that you believe in that kind of stuff, Greg. I wouldn't want to go on record with garbage like that either.)

It's no use, David. I think it's pretty clear to everyone that you are simply trying to divert attention with those types of comments. Anything to avoid answering a simple yes or no question.

Here it is again:

Did the WC and FBI waste resources in compiling a LHO bio?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did the WC and FBI waste resources in compiling a LHO bio?

To some extent, yes.

Because, in the final analysis, it's the physical evidence (plus the eyewitness evidence and Oswald's own guilty actions on 11/21/63 and 11/22/63) that solve this case. It's not LHO's bio that solves it.

Although, yes, it's nice to know the background of the person who committed the crime. Of course it's nice to know that. But a jury wants to see the PROOF that the accused committed the crime -- and there's more than enough proof in this case to show that the accused person (Oswald) did commit the two murders that he was charged with committing in 1963. And there is no hard evidence to indicate that Oswald was a "patsy" or that he conspired with anyone else.

You've got loose threads (very loose ones) that you must think mean something when it comes to solving the JFK case. (Otherwise, you wouldn't be bringing them up in the first place.) But one thing you don't have -- and never will -- is the needle or the glue that ties those loose threads to the Presidential assassination in question.

Tie them together, Greg.

I'll be waiting.

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Related Quote (which I've just added to my "Quoting Common Sense" website). I was surprised to learn today that this is the first one from Mr. Mack that I've put on my site. That's a blatant oversight on my part, because Gary's common-sense offerings are plentiful. I'll have to see about adding some more in the future:

"The [sixth Floor] Museum has NO position, just history. .... Oswald ordered a Carcano, got one, let others see it, had himself photographed with it, used it to try to kill someone but failed, then used it again to kill and injure. That’s what history says and no amount of whining and question asking [by conspiracy theorists] changes any aspect of that. There is simply no significant evidence that has changed that history, at least so far." -- Gary Mack; August 6, 2012

Quoting-Common-Sense-Logo.png

Excuse me, David... that line you just posted was in an email addressed to ME from Gary... you were and continued to be CC'd for some reason....

You did not ask my permission to post something addressed to me, sent to me and from a discussion I was having with Gary...

If you're not being manipulated, why can't you just let Gary man up and post HIS WORDS HIMSELF, and if you are NOT the party to whom an email is address, I suggest you get the addressee's permission before quoting.... and since Gary must have given you the okay to post

When I discussed with Gary the NEED to see these other Kleins orders to either support or weaken the FC was sent bullsh!t... this was his reply....

From: Gary Mack [mailto:GMack@jfk.org]

Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 11:14 AM

To: David Josephs

Cc: David Von Pein (DaveVonPein@aol.com)

Subject: RE: Help Please - need to see FBI Item D-77: Kleins orders

Dear SPINster,

The Museum has NO position, just history. I have my personal opinions, which I gave you. Oswald ordered a Carcano, got one, let others see it, had himself photographed with it, used it to try to kill someone but failed, then used it again to kill and injure. That’s what history says and no amount of whining and question asking [you’ve] offered changes any aspect of that. There is simply no significant evidence that has changed that history, at least so far. For my part, I offered a recording and a photograph that – and I still believe this - with corroboration would have done just that. You offer…….what? Yet another question that is irrelevant to the fact that Oswald’s rifle was and remains directly linked to him and the Kennedy assassination?

Gary

THIS dvp, is the curator of a MUSEUM, who could care less if the information, the HISTORY as approved.... is factual or not...

DO NOT POST ANYTHING FROM MY EMAILS WITH GARY.... if he wants to copy/paste and send to you for publication... oh right, you are NOT manipulated by Gary...

:news

Edited by David Josephs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You did not ask my permission to post something addressed to me, sent to me and from a discussion I was having with Gary.

You think I need your permission to post something that I received via e-mail from Gary? Get real.

If you've got a gripe about your private mails with Gary Mack, go gripe to him, and tell him not to send a carbon copy to me anymore. That'll solve it.

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Davey,

How many postal zones do you think NYC had back in 1963?

Maybe a hundred.

And the machines went up to, what number?

Who cares?

I'll again offer the responses from TWO different people from two different highly-specialized "postmark" type organizations...either of which is in a much better position (knowledge-wise) to know about these trivial "postmark" matters than anyone else on this JFK forum. Here they are, for DiEugenio to sidestep and/or ignore for a third time:

"It just means that it was cancelled at machine 12 where they cancelled the mail in Dallas. It's not a zone code or anything."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The 12 is the machine number that canceled the envelope. Larger post offices have multiple machines to cancel their mail, so they number the machines and sometimes the machine number appears in the postmark, and sometimes it appears in the killer bars."

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did the WC and FBI waste resources in compiling a LHO bio?

To some extent, yes.

Because, in the final analysis, it's the physical evidence (plus the eyewitness evidence and Oswald's own guilty actions on 11/21/63 and 11/22/63) that solve this case. It's not LHO's bio that solves it.

Which is where you go wrong. Even legitimate physical evidence pointing to one man does not rule out co-offenders. Nor does it explain motive, or help understand the triggers for potential assassins to be tipped over the edge.

Although, yes, it's nice

It's not "nice". It's essential.

to know the background of the person who committed the crime. Of course it's nice to know that. But a jury wants to see the PROOF that the accused committed the crime -- and there's more than enough proof in this case to show that the accused person (Oswald) did commit the two murders that he was charged with committing in 1963. And there is no hard evidence to indicate that Oswald was a "patsy" or that he conspired with anyone else.

You've got loose threads (very loose ones) that you must think mean something when it comes to solving the JFK case. (Otherwise, you wouldn't be bringing them up in the first place.)

No. I have germane facts which were omitted from previous inquiries.

But one thing you don't have -- and never will -- is the needle or the glue that ties those loose threads to the Presidential assassination in question.

Tie them together, Greg.

I'll be waiting.

Do you think I would give you everything I have? Be patient. I have only posted a fraction of it. And it will stand and speak for itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Davey,

How many postal zones do you think NYC had back in 1963?

Maybe a hundred.

And the machines went up to, what number?

Who cares?

I'll again offer the responses from TWO different people from two different highly-specialized "postmark" type organizations...either of which is in a much better position (knowledge-wise) to know about these trivial "postmark" matters than anyone else on this JFK forum. Here they are, for DiEugenio to sidestep and/or ignore for a third time:

"It just means that it was cancelled at machine 12 where they cancelled the mail in Dallas. It's not a zone code or anything."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The 12 is the machine number that canceled the envelope. Larger post offices have multiple machines to cancel their mail, so they number the machines and sometimes the machine number appears in the postmark, and sometimes it appears in the killer bars."

David, we only have your word about the quotes, remember?

What would really seal it for me is

->an explanation for the need to have the machine number on the cancellation. Such things are not done without reason, so let's hear it.

-> an estimate of how many cancellation machines would be needed for a city the size of Dallas in '63.

-> how big the mail room was where these machines were because the minimum number of machines in '63 is two because they work in tandem with each other.

https://docs.google....dHLUw6fKobwLrLg

They also need belt drives feeding the mail to them, and tables at the other end. It seems to me six sets of machines (12 in total) would require a lot of space.

Edited by Greg Parker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3.) The three tramps, whose arrest records were discovered years later (by a pair of conspiracy theorists, of all people), with the tramps turning out to be nothing but...real tramps.

David David.... Like CE399, the tramps in the photo have been shown NOT to be the ones identified...

but why let things like facts, evidence and proof stand in the way of your propaganda mission... right?

Except the REAL tramps were booked and spent 3 days in jail.... whereas the tramps in the photo were all released that afternoon...

Chambers tell us they let them all go... after an initial discussion... and for the life of him cannot understandhow his name got onto their arrest reports....

http://jfkassassinationfiles.com/fbi_124-10179-10312 page 3, 2nd paragraph

http://jfkassassinationfiles.com/fbi_124-10151-10221 page 3 2nd paragraph as well states that DOYLE, one of the people YOU SAY was one of the tramps arrested... tells us that they were booked and sentenced to 6 days in jail yet only stayed for 3....

http://jfkassassinationfiles.com/fbi_124-10179-10310 page 5 - Wise telling us how smelly and dirty these men were even though they said they had gone to a mission, showered and eaten before being captured....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks David. I again congratulate you for doing the work.

The sense I get through all the uncertainty is that the ones marked e.g. 2A or 2B are more likely to be machine numbers. I say this because there are no examples given with a "C" "D" "E" etc. This fits with 2 machines working in tandem as I suggested e.g. machines 1A & 1B etc. The "12" on the other hand, could denote at least two or three different things, including (and possibly most likely) a postal area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, you could be right, Greg. Here's an excerpt of what I wrote on my site:

"One thing, however, that might go in the direction of the "12" on Oswald's rifle-order envelope (CE773) being a postal zone code after all is the fact that the "12" is facing the same direction as the letters in "Dallas, Tex." (as if the "12" could be a continuation of the "Dallas, Tex." location), whereas in the Dallas postmarks that have a number/letter combination stamped on them (like "3B" and "2B"), those markings are facing the other way, opposite the way that "Dallas, Tex." is engraved on the postmark. Whether or not that "upside down" fact regarding the number/letter codes is significant at all in determining the meaning of such markings, I haven't the foggiest idea. But I thought it was worth mentioning anyway." -- DVP; 8/13/12

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In case anybody cares, here are the latest replies I have received:

DON PEARSON OF THE "MACHINE CANCEL SOCIETY" SAID:

Interesting. I had not read that part of the conspiracy. I think the more interesting part is the cancel. A Pitney Bowes, I think.

================================

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

But what does the "12" in the postmark mean, Don? That's the key question. Any thoughts?

================================

A MEMBER OF THE "MACHINE CANCEL SOCIETY" SAID:

The 12 just means that this piece of mail was canceled on machine #12 in the main post office -- or main handling office for sorting mail, if that is somewhere other than the main post office building.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-postmark-on-commission-exhibit-773.html

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...